DOCSLIB.ORG

Defending Marxist Hegelianism Against a Marxist Critique Chris Cutrone of the US Platypus Group Takes Issue with Mike Macnair

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Defending Marxist Hegelianism Against a Marxist Critique Chris Cutrone of the US Platypus Group Takes Issue with Mike Macnair 14 August 11 2011 878 Debate Defending Marxist Hegelianism against a Marxist critique Chris Cutrone of the US Platypus group takes issue with Mike Macnair am writing in response to Mike concrete mediations of the historically Macnair’s 2003 critical review of constituted workers’ movement. books by John Rees and David Kautsky failed in this. Lenin agreed I 1 Renton, cited in Macnair’s critique with Luxemburg in her Junius pamphlet of Platypus (‘No need for party?’ (1915) that the problem was Kautsky Weekly Worker May 12 2011).2 I wish thinking that the SPD’s Marxism (that to refer also to my three letters and is, what became Kautsky’s USPD) article in response.3 could “hide like a rabbit” during World I find Macnair’s analysis and War I and resume the struggle for critique of the political motivations socialism afterward. Or, as Lenin put and potential consequences of Rees’s it in his Imperialism: the highest stage affirmative account of Marxist of capitalism (1916) and Socialism and Hegelianism compelling and good. war (1915), contra Kautsky’s theory I agree with Macnair’s conclusion of ‘ultra-imperialism’, the world war that, despite Rees’s former SWP/UK must be seen as a necessary and not leader Alex Callinicos’s anti-Hegelian accidental outcome of the historical Althusserianism, Rees considering development of capitalism, and so “historical experience summed up in a crisis that was an opportunity for theory” was intrinsically connected to revolutionary transformation, and the SWP’s concept of the party as one not merely, as Kautsky thought, which “centralises experience”, with all a derailment into barbarism to be the problems such a conception entails. resisted. This was the essential basis I wish to offer a rejoinder to for agreement between Luxemburg and Macnair’s idea that such problematic Lenin 1914-19. conceptions of theory and political I do not think the separation of the practice have roots in Lenin, pre-World War I Lenin from Luxemburg Luxemburg and Lukács, Macnair’s is warranted, especially considering analysis of whom I find to be false. their close collaboration, both in the Also, I do not think that Macnair quite politics of the Russian movement gets Hegel, although I agree with his and in the Second International more characterisation that “philosophy - generally, throughout the period 1905- as such - is inherently only a way 12 and again 1914-19. Throughout of interpreting the world”, and so their careers, Lenin and Luxemburg limits Hegel’s work for the political (and Trotsky) were exemplars of the purposes under consideration.4 Second International left, or ‘radicals’ Furthermore, I agree with Macnair’s in the movement. They all more or interpretation of Lenin with respect to less mistook Kautsky to be one of the purposes of his polemical defence their own before August 1914. Also, of Marxist approaches to philosophy Kautsky himself changed, at various in Materialism and empirio-criticism points and times - which is not to say (1908). Moreover, I agree with his that Lenin, Luxemburg and Trotsky central point that philosophical never changed. agreement cannot be the basis of But the question is the nature and agreement on political action. character of such change, and how However, as Nicholas Brown these figures allow us to grasp the responded to comrade Macnair’s history of Marxism. It is not about question at the opening plenary on learning from their trials and errors, ‘The politics of critical theory’ of I think, but rather from the example the Platypus convention in Chicago of their ‘consciousness’, not merely on April 29, it is not possible to theoretically, but practically. Moreover, ‘Hegelianise’ Marx, because Marx the history of Marxism must be was more Hegelian than Hegel approached as part and parcel, and the himself.5 That is, Marx tried to achieve highest expression, of the history of the ‘Hegelian’ self-consciousness post-1848 capital. of his own historical moment. The question is, what relevance has Marx’s Hegelianism Hegelianism today, and what is the Lukács’s ‘Hegelian’ point was relevance of taking such a Hegelian that “subjective” struggles for approach to the history of Marxism transformation take place in and subsequent to Marx? through “necessary forms of appearance” that misrecognise their Lukács, Lenin, “objective” social realities, not in terms Luxemburg of imperfect approximations or more I disagree that Lukács’s “subject” of or less true generalised abstractions, history is the point of view or relative but specifically as a function of the perspective of the proletariat as the “alienated” and “reified” social and revolutionary agent that must assert Dialectical spiral political dynamics of capital. Capital its “will”. Rather, I take Lukács to is “objective” in a specific way, and so be following Lenin and Luxemburg voluntarist (and substitutionalist) favour of the mass strike as a tactic, let showed that the world had moved poses historically specific problems for (and Marx) quite differently than conception of the working class and alone strategy, but rather an analysis into an era of revolutionary struggle subjectivity. Macnair seems to think, in that the the political party of communism. of the significance of the mass strike that demanded changes in the The reason for Marxists workers’ movement for socialism is Rather, Lenin consistently criticised in the 1905 Russian Revolution as a workers’ movement for socialism. A distinguishing their approach from the necessary mediation for grasping and politically fought against those historical phenomenon, inextricably contradiction had developed between Hegel is precisely historical: that a the problem of capital in its “totality”, tendencies of Bolshevism and in the bound up in the development of the social democratic party and (its change in society took place between that the workers must not remake the early Third International. I do not think capital at a global scale, and how own associated) labour unions, or Hegel’s and Marx’s time that causes world in their image, but rather lead that Lenin’s newly found ‘Hegelianism’ this tasked and challenged the social ‘social democracy’ had become a self- Hegelian categories, as those of an society more generally beyond capital. after 1914 was the means by which he democratic workers’ movement (the contradictory phenomenon in need of earlier, pre-Industrial Revolution era of Hence, as Macnair characterises the achieved (mistaken) rapprochement Second International and the SPD in transformation. bourgeois society, to become inverted approach of the Kautskyan “centre” of with the ‘left’. particular) to reformulate its approach Furthermore, I take Lenin’s critiques in truth, or reversed in intention. Marx’s the Second International, the socialist The key is Luxemburg. I do not think and transform itself under such changed of Kautsky for being “non-dialectical” idea was that the “contradiction” of workers’ movement must be a leading, she was a semi-syndicalist spontaneist/ historical conditions, specifically with to be very specific. This is not a critique bourgeois society had changed. Thus practical force in democratic struggles voluntarist, or that she neglected issues regard to the relation of the party to of Kautsky ‘philosophically’ (although the dialectical “law of motion” was beyond the workers’ own (sectional) of political mediation: she was not an the unions. it does speak to his bad practices as specific to the problem of capital and interests in the transformation of ‘ultra-left’. I take her pamphlet, The Luxemburg’s perspective was a theorist), but politically. It is about not a transhistorical principle of (social) society as a whole. mass strike, the political party, and neither anarcho-syndicalist/spontaneist Kautsky’s non-dialectical approach to action and thought. Marx’s society was I disagree that Lenin made a virtue the trade unions (1906), to have an nor vanguardist, but rather dialectical. politics: that is, the relation of theory not Hegel’s. The meaning of Hegel of necessity in the Russian Revolution entirely different political purpose and The mass strike was not a timeless and practice, or of social being and had changed, just as the meaning of after October 1917 and adopted a conclusion. It was not an argument in principle. For Luxemburg, 1905 consciousness, in and through the the categories of bourgeois society had 878 August 11 2011 15 15 SUMMER OFFENSIVE What we changed. Labour-time as value had become socialist revolution was supposed to open The problem we have faced since then fight for not productive (if not unproblematically) - as the door to this transformation. The potential is that the defeat of the workers’ movement n in Hegel’s and Adam Smith’s time, the era for emancipated humanity expressed in for socialism has not meant the stabilisation, Our central aim is the organisation of communists, revolutionary socialists and all politically ad- of ‘manufacture’ - but destructive of society; communism that Marx recognised in the but rather the degeneration, disintegration vanced workers into a Communist Party. Without as a form of social mediation, wage-labour modern history of capital is not assimilable and decomposition, of bourgeois society - organisation the working class is nothing; with the had become self-contradictory and self- without remainder to pre- or non-Marxian without the concomitant increase, but rather highest form of organisation it is everything. undermining in the Industrial Revolution, socialism. the regression, of possibilities for moving n The Provisional Central Committee organises mem- hence the ‘crisis of capital’. As Marx put it, “Communism is the beyond it. This shows that the crisis of bers of the Communist Party, but there exists no real One fundamental disagreement I have necessary form and the dynamic principle Marxism was a crisis of bourgeois society, or Communist Party today. There are many so-called ‘par- with Macnair’s approach, in which I think of the immediate future, but communism as the highest and most acute aspect of the crisis ties’ on the left.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Making History – Alex Callinicos
    MAKING HISTORY HISTORICAL MATERIALISM BOOK SERIES Editorial board PAUL BLACKLEDGE, London - SEBASTIAN BUDGEN, London JIM KINCAID, Leeds - STATHIS KOUVELAKIS, Paris MARCEL VAN DER LINDEN, Amsterdam - CHINA MIÉVILLE, London WARREN MONTAG, Los Angeles - PAUL REYNOLDS, Lancashire TONY SMITH, Ames (IA) MAKING HISTORY Agency, Structure, and Change in Social Theory BY ALEX CALLINICOS BRILL LEIDEN • BOSTON 2004 This book is printed on acid-free paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Callinicos, Alex. Making history : agency, structure, and change in social theory / Alex Callinicos – 2nd ed. p. cm. — (Historical materialism book series, ISSN 1570-1522 ; 3) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 90-04-13627-4 (alk. paper) 1. Agent (Philosophy) 2. Act (Philosophy) 3. Structuralism. 4. Historical materialism. 5. Revolutions—Philosophy. 6. Marx, Karl, 1818-1883. I. Title. II. Series. BD450.C23 2004 128’.4—dc22 2004045143 second revised edition ISSN 1570-1522 ISBN 90 04 13827 4 © Copyright 2004 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910 Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS To John and Aelda Callinicos This page intentionally left blank Contents Preface ............................................................................................................ ix Introduction to the Second Edition ............................................................ xiii Introduction ...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Considering Crises and Neoliberalism: an Interview with Dr. Alex Callinicos
    disClosure: A Journal of Social Theory Volume 24 Market Failures, Famines, & Crises Article 15 5-5-2015 Considering Crises and Neoliberalism: An Interview with Dr. Alex Callinicos Andrew Beutel University of Kentucky Delmar Reffett University of Kentucky Ashley Ruderman University of Kentucky DOI: https://doi.org/10.13023/disclosure.24.14 Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/disclosure This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License. Recommended Citation Beutel, Andrew; Reffett, Delmar; and Ruderman, Ashley (2015) "Considering Crises and Neoliberalism: An Interview with Dr. Alex Callinicos," disClosure: A Journal of Social Theory: Vol. 24 , Article 15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13023/disclosure.24.14 Available at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/disclosure/vol24/iss1/15 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by disClosure: A Journal of Social Theory. Questions about the journal can be sent to [email protected] Considering Crises and Neoliberalism: An Interview with Dr. Alex Callinicos ANDREW BEUTEL, DELMAR REFFETT, & ASHLEY RUDERMAN University of Kentucky Alex Callinicos is Professor of European Studies at King’s College London. His research interests include European social and political theory, contemporary political philosophy and critical theory, historiography, and international political economy. He seeks to show how a Marxist understanding of capitalism can identify the interaction between deep-seated structural tendencies towards crisis and the cycle of boom and bust in the financial markets responsible for what some commentators are beginning to call the Long Depression. disClosure Interviewers: Andrew Beutel, Delmar Reffett, and Ashley Ruderman DC: You’ve had a really wonderful career.
    [Show full text]
  • Trotsky and the Problem of Soviet Bureaucracy
    TROTSKY AND THE PROBLEM OF SOVIET BUREAUCRACY by Thomas Marshall Twiss B.A., Mount Union College, 1971 M.A., University of Pittsburgh, 1972 M.S., Drexel University, 1997 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Pittsburgh 2009 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES This dissertation was presented by Thomas Marshall Twiss It was defended on April 16, 2009 and approved by William Chase, Professor, Department of History Ronald H. Linden, Professor, Department of Political Science Ilya Prizel, Professor, Department of Political Science Dissertation Advisor: Jonathan Harris, Professor, Department of Political Science ii Copyright © by Thomas Marshall Twiss 2009 iii TROTSKY AND THE PROBLEM OF SOVIET BUREAUCRACY Thomas Marshall Twiss, PhD University of Pittsburgh, 2009 In 1917 the Bolsheviks anticipated, on the basis of the Marxist classics, that the proletarian revolution would put an end to bureaucracy. However, soon after the revolution many within the Bolshevik Party, including Trotsky, were denouncing Soviet bureaucracy as a persistent problem. In fact, for Trotsky the problem of Soviet bureaucracy became the central political and theoretical issue that preoccupied him for the remainder of his life. This study examines the development of Leon Trotsky’s views on that subject from the first years after the Russian Revolution through the completion of his work The Revolution Betrayed in 1936. In his various writings over these years Trotsky expressed three main understandings of the nature of the problem: During the civil war and the first years of NEP he denounced inefficiency in the distribution of supplies to the Red Army and resources throughout the economy as a whole.
    [Show full text]
  • Alex Callinicos Ali Saqer*
    Exchanges : the Warwick Research Journal A Conversation with…Alex Callinicos Ali Saqer* Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Warwick *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract Professor Alex Callinicos is a renowned social theorist and scholar of international political economy. He conducts research on Marx and Marxism, European social and political theory, contemporary political philosophy, critical theory, historiography, and international political economy. His work provides invaluable insights on issues of race and racism, social justice, the Third Way, imperialism, austerity, and EU politics, among many other fascinating contemporary issues. Alex studied Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at Balliol College, Oxford, and Philosophy of Science at the London School of Economics before writing a DPhil on Marx's Capital, also at Balliol. He was a Junior Research Fellow in Contemporary Social Thought at St Peter's College, Oxford from 1979 to 1981, after which he taught social and political theory at the Department of Politics at the University of York until 2005, when he moved to King's College London. Alex is currently the Professor of European Studies at Peer review: This article King's and editor of International Socialism. Alex has been an active has been subject to a contributor to the development of the movement for another double blind peer review globalization, participating in the World Social Forum and an animator of process the European Social Forum. Among his best known books are The Revolutionary Ideas of Karl Marx (1983), Against Postmodernism (1990), Social Theory (1999), An Anti-Capitalist Manifesto (2003), The Resources of Critique (2006), Imperialism and Global Political Economy (2009).
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Companion to Contemporary Marxism
    Critical Companion to Contemporary Marxism BIDET2_f1_i-xv.indd i 10/25/2007 8:05:05 PM Historical Materialism Book Series Editorial Board Paul Blackledge, Leeds – Sébastien Budgen, Paris Michael Krätke, Amsterdam – Stathis Kouvelakis, London – Marcel van der Linden, Amsterdam China Miéville, London – Paul Reynolds, Lancashire Peter Thomas, Amsterdam VOLUME 16 BIDET2_f1_i-xv.indd ii 10/25/2007 8:05:05 PM Critical Companion to Contemporary Marxism Edited by Jacques Bidet and Stathis Kouvelakis LEIDEN • BOSTON 2008 BIDET2_f1_i-xv.indd iii 10/25/2007 8:05:05 PM This book is an English translation of Jacques Bidet and Eustache Kouvelakis, Dic- tionnaire Marx contemporain. C. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris 2001. Ouvrage publié avec le concours du Ministère français chargé de la culture – Centre national du Livre. This book has been published with financial aid of CNL (Centre National du Livre), France. This book is printed on acid-free paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Translations by Gregory Elliott. ISSN 1570-1522 ISBN 978 90 04 14598 6 Copyright 2008 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishing, IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Theory, Historical Materialism, and the Ostensible End of Marxism: the Poverty of Theory Revisited
    Critical Theory, Historical Materialism, and the Ostensible End of Marxism: The Poverty of Theory Revisited BRYAN D. PALMER Summary: This essay notes the extent to which poststructuralism/postmodernism have generally espoused hostility to historical materialism, surveys some representative examples of historical writing that have gravitated toward the new critical theory in opposition to Marxism, and closes with a discussion of the ironic evolution of a poststructurally inclined, anti-Marxist historiography. Counter to the prevailing ideological consensus that Marxism has been brought to its interpretive knees by a series of analytic challenges and the political collapse of the world's ostensibly "socialist" states, this essay argues that historical materialism has lost neither its power to interpret the past nor its relevance to the contemporary intellectual terrain. It is now a decade-and-one-half since Edward Thompson penned The Poverty of Theory: or an Orrery of Errors, and ten times as many years have passed since the publication of Marx's The Poverty of Philosophy.1 Whatever one may think about the advances in knowledge associated with historical materialism and Marxism, particularly in terms of the practice of historical writing, there is no denying that this sesquicentennial has been a problematic period in the making of communist society; the last fifteen years, moreover, are associated with the bleak end of socialism and the passing of Marxism as an intellectual force. Indeed, it is a curious conjuncture of our times that the
    [Show full text]
  • Postmodernism, Historical Materialism and Chicana/O Cultural Studies
    UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Previously Published Works Title Postmodernism, historical materialism and Chicana/o cultural studies Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9ph6b9s2 Journal Science & Society, 68(2) ISSN 0036-8237 Author Gonzalez, M Publication Date 2004 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California 161 Marcial González, “Postmodernism, Historical Materialism, and Chicana/o Cultural Studies,” Science and Society: A Journal of Marxist Thought and Analysis 68:2 (Summer 2004): 161-186. Postmodernism, Historical Materialism and Chicana/o Cultural Studies Marcial González Today we are more fragmented than ever, which is terrible, which is beautiful. – Ruben Martínez (1998, 22) ABSTRACT: During the past two decades, critics have taken an interest in explaining the ideological ambivalence expressed in Chicana/o literature. Most critics correctly point out that Chicana/o ambivalence cannot be separated from the conflicted material realities historically experienced by Mexican Americans, but this view has not prevented some critics from tiptoeing into the idealist terrain of postmodernism. Postmodernist theory has provided Chicana/o criticism with conceptual tools for explaining the heterogeneity of culture, but its antagonism toward history and class analysis has limited the potential for Chicana/o studies to develop an effective social criticism. Two postmodernist terms used to describe ambivalence are “cultural schizophrenia” and “heterotopia.” Historical materialism •• a method that makes truth- claims about social existence after a rigorous critique of the concepts and ideas that emerge from that existence •• stands as a viable alternative to postmodernist theory for the interpretation of Chicana/o literature. In this essay, I examine the influence of postmodernist theory on Chicana/o cultural studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Are More Equal Than Others
    Some Are More Equal Than Others Essays on the transition in South Africa Neville Alexander 0 Some Are More Equal Than Others was first published by Buchu Books in 1993. ISBN 1-874863-09-1 © Copyright Neville Alexander 1993. All rights reserved. This digital edition published 2013 © Copyright The Estate of Neville Edward Alexander 2013 This edition is not for sale and is available for non-commercial use only. All enquiries relating to commercial use, distribution or storage should be addressed to the publisher: The Estate of Neville Edward Alexander, PO Box 1384, Sea Point 8060, South Africa The Politics of National and Institutional Transformation was first presented at the UDUSA National Conference, University of Durban-Westville, 1–3 July 1992. Africa and the New World Order was first presented as the keynote address at the Humboldt Colloquium held in Cotonou, Benin, 17–19 July 1992. It was subsequently published in the Alexander von Humboldt Stiftung journal Mitteilungen, Heft 60, 1992 Negotiations and the Struggle for Socialism in South Africa was prepared for the Ruth First Memorial Colloquium on The Possibilities of Radical Transformation in Southern Africa After Negotiations: Theory and Policy, Centre for Southern African Studies, University of the Western Cape, 17–18 August 1992. The National Situation was first presented to the third national conference of the Workers Organisation for Socialist Action (WOSA), Community House, Cape Town, April 1993. Problems of Democratisation in South Africa was first presented at the annual conference of the. German African Studies Association held in Mainz, Germany in May 1993. Fundamentals of Education Policy for a Democratic South Africa was first presented at the Umtapo Centre Conference on Education for Democracy in a Post-Apartheid South Africa, held in Durban on 24 July 1993.
    [Show full text]
  • Lenin Reloaded
    Lenin Reloaded SIC stands for psychoana- lytic interpretation at its most elementary: no dis- covery of deep, hidden meaning, just the act of drawing attention to the litterality [sic!] of what pre- cedes it. A “sic” reminds us that what was said, in- clusive of its blunders, was effectively said and cannot be undone. The series SIC thus explores different connections to the Freud- ian field. Each volume pro- vides a bundle of Lacanian interventions into a spe- cific domain of ongoing theoretical, cultural, and SIC ideological-political battles. It is neither “pluralist” A nor “socially sensitive”: series unabashedly avowing its exclusive Lacanian orienta- edited tion, it disregards any form by of correctness but the inherent correctness of Slavoj theory itself. Žižek Lenin Toward a Politics of Truth Reloaded Sebastian Budgen, Stathis Kouvelakis, and Slavoj Žižek, editors sic 7 DUKE UNIVERSITY PRESS Durham and London 2007 © 2007 Duke University Press All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper ♾ Typeset in Sabon by Tseng Information Systems, Inc. Library of Congress Cataloging-in- Publication Data appear on the last printed page of this book. Contents Sebastian Budgen, Stathis Kouvelakis, and Slavoj Žižek, Introduction: Repeating Lenin 1 PART I. RETRIEVING LENIN 1 Alain Badiou, One Divides Itself into Two 7 2 Alex Callinicos, Leninism in the Twenty-first Century?: Lenin, Weber, and the Politics of Responsibility 18 3 Terry Eagleton, Lenin in the Postmodern Age 42 4 Fredric Jameson, Lenin and Revisionism 59 5 Slavoj Žižek, A Leninist Gesture Today: Against the Populist Temptation 74 PART II.
    [Show full text]
  • The Revolutionary Ideas of Karl Marx
    THE REVOLUTIONARY IDEAS OF KARL MARX THE REVOLUTIONARY IDEAS OF KARL MARX ALEX CALLINICOS uBOOKMARKS London and Sydney The Revolutionary Ideas of Karl Marx - Alex Callinicos First published 1983. Second edition published igg3 - Reprinted with corrections igg6. Second reprint lggg. Third reprint 200p. Bookmarks Publications Ltd, c/o 1 Bloomsbury Street, London WClB 3QF Bookmarks, PO B0XA338, Sydney South, NSW2000, Australia Copyright ©Bookmarks Publications Ltd ISBNi 838876134 Printed by Biddles Cover by Noel Douglas Bookmarks Publications Ltd is linked to an international grouping of socialist organisations: AustraliaInternational Socialist Organisation, PO B0XA338, Sydney South, [email protected] AustriaLinkswende, Postfach 87, 1108 Wien, [email protected] Britain Socialist Workers Party, PO Box 82, London P3 gLH. [email protected] CanadaInternational Socialists, PO Box339 > Station P, Toronto, Ontario M6Hppg. iscanada@ on.aibn.com CyprusFrgatikiDemokratia, PO Box 27280, Nicosia, [email protected] Czech RepublicSocialisticka Solidarita, PO Boxl002, 11121 Praha 1. [email protected] DenmarkInternationale Socialister, PO Box $11$, 8lOO Aarhus C. [email protected] Finland Sosialistiliitto, PL 288, 00171 Helsinki, [email protected] FranceSocialismeparen has, BP lg-gpill, Arcueil Cedex. [email protected] GermanyLinksruck, Postfach 44 0348, 12003 Berlin, [email protected] GhanaInternational Sodalist Organisation, PO Box TF202, Trade Fair, Labadi, Accra. isogh@ hotmail. com GreeceSosialistiko Frgatiko Komma, c/o Workers Solidarity, PO Box8l 6l, Athens 100 10. [email protected] Holland Internationale Socialisten, PO Boxg202/, lOgoAAAmsterdam. info @intemationalesocialisten. org IrelandSodalist Workers Party, PO Box 1648, Dublin 8. [email protected] ItalyComunismo dal Basso, Leeder, CP Bologna, Succ3. [email protected] New ZealandSodalist Workers Organisation, PO Box 13-683, Auckland. sodalist-worker@p I.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Anti-Apartheid, Anti-Capitalism, and Anti-Imperialism: Liberation In
    Anti-Apartheid, Anti-Capitalism, and Anti-Imperialism: Liberation in South Africa? The first Mandela was Jesus Christ. The Second was Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela. The third Nelson Mandela are the poor people of the world. (S’bu Zikode, a leader of Abahlali baseMjondolo, the South African shack dwellers movement, quoted in Gibson 2006: 12) Ness, Immanuel and Cope, Zac (editors) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Imperialism and Anti- Imperialism New York: Palgrave Macmillan Introduction On 16 August 2012, heavily armed South African police ambushed and hunted down striking mine workers. They killed 34 miners, wounded another 78 and then arrested a further 177 strikers, incredibly charging them with murder. The miners worked at Marikana platinum mine owned by British company Lonmin, and were on strike for a living wage (Alexander et al. 2012). A tough hand had been called for by Cyril Ramaphosa, once a leader of the miners union, but now a multi- millionaire and a Lonmin shareholder. The Marikana Massacre was a turning point, demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that the ANC Government sides with big business against the workers. Little over a year later, on 5 December 2013, Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, the personification of dignified resistance to apartheid, and his country’s first democratically elected president, died aged 94 years. The world’s media recalled Mandela’s role in leading the ANC liberation struggle, his 27 years in prison, and dwelt at length on the generosity of his spirit in the reconciliation with his former oppressors. Honouring a great man whom they had spent decades fighting was not simple hypocrisy; the international bourgeoisie let out a detectable collective sigh of relief that matters had not turned out worse.
    [Show full text]
  • On Marxist Accounts of the Crisis Joseph Choonara, International Socialism, Issue: 132, 2011
    Once more (with feeling) on Marxist accounts of the crisis Joseph Choonara, International Socialism, Issue: 132, 2011 A review of David McNally, Global Slump: The Economics and Politics of Crisis and Resistance (Spectre, 2011), £12.95; and Leo Panich, Greg Albo and Vivek Chibber (eds), Socialist Register 2011: The Crisis This Time (Merlin, 2011), £25 David McNally’s Global Slump and the latest Socialist Register add to the growing body of Marxist literature on the current crisis of capitalism.1 Here I will focus on the former work but utilise some of the essays in the latter, which contains an eclectic series of takes on the crisis, to make my case.2 And there is a case to be made against McNally. Needless to say, Global Slump has its share of positive aspects. It is an avowedly Marxist analysis.3 It presents a lively account of the subprime mortgage crisis of 2007 and the great panic that followed in autumn 2008 as Lehman Brothers collapsed. In addition, the author identifies throughout with the oppressed and exploited. This is all commendable. However, I will focus on the theoretical core of McNally’s book, which is composed of arguments that are flawed and inconsistent, backed up by evidence that is weak or at times simply wrong. McNally’s targets are those “radical political economists” who “say that Western capitalism underwent a great boom for a quarter of a century (1948-73), only to fall into a crisis or depression from which it has, for 40 years, never recovered”.4 This includes John Bellamy Foster and Fred Magdoff, of the Monthly
    [Show full text]